United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
Procedures for filing Objections:
Recommended Disposition (“Recommendation”) has
been sent to District Judge J. Leon Holmes. You may file
written objections to this Recommendation. If you file
objections, they must be specific and must include the
factual or legal basis for your objection.
objections must be received in the office of the United
States District Court Clerk within fourteen (14) days of this
objections are filed, Judge Holmes can adopt this
Recommendation without independently reviewing the record. By
not objecting, you may also waive any right to appeal
questions of fact.
Kathryn Franklin, applied for disability benefits on June 27,
2015, alleging a disability onset date of December 30, 2014
(Tr. at 11). After conducting a hearing, the Administrative
Law Judge (“ALJ”) denied her application. (Tr. at
24). The Appeals Council denied her request for review. (Tr.
at 1). The ALJ's decision now stands as the final
decision of the Commissioner, and Franklin has requested
reasons stated below, this Court should affirm the decision
of the Commissioner.
The Commissioner's Decision:
found that Franklin had not engaged in substantial gainful
activity since the alleged onset date of December 30, 2014.
(Tr. at 14). The ALJ found, at Step Two of the sequential
five-step analysis, that Franklin had the following medically
determinable impairments: cervical muscle strain, lumbar back
sprain, neck muscle spasms, high blood pressure, carpal
tunnel syndrome, obesity, and anxiety. (Tr. at 14).
Three, the ALJ determined that Franklin's impairments did
not meet or equal a listed impairment. Id. Before
proceeding to Step Four, the ALJ determined that Franklin had
the residual functional capacity (“RFC”) to
perform sedentary work with restrictions: 1) she could only
occasionally climb, stoop, kneel, crawl, and crouch; 2) she
could only occasional balance and could not work around
unprotected heights, ladders, or scaffolds; 3) she would be
limited to only frequent reaching and handling; 4) she could
perform unskilled work, where she could remember, understand,
and follow concrete instructions and have superficial contact
with supervisors, co-workers, and the public. (Tr. at 16).
on that RFC, the ALJ determined that Franklin was able to
perform past relevant work as a surveillance system monitor.
(Tr. at 24). Based on that determination, the ALJ held that
Franklin was not disabled. Id.
Standard of Review The Court's role is to determine
whether the Commissioner's findings are supported by
substantial evidence. Prosch v. Apfel, 201 F.3d
1010, 1012 (8th Cir. 2000). “Substantial
evidence” in this context means less than a
preponderance but more than a scintilla. Slusser v.
Astrue, 557 F.3d 923, 925 (8th Cir. 2009). In other
words, it is Aenough that a reasonable mind would find it
adequate to support the ALJ's decision."
Id. (citation omitted). The Court must consider not
only evidence that supports the Commissioner's decision,
but also evidence that supports a contrary outcome. The Court
cannot reverse the decision, however, Amerely ...